Easter is for children

We had yet another good Easter sermon from Pastor Douthwaite, with the texts Luke 24:36-49 (1 John 3:1-7; Acts 3:11-21).  (Remember that it is still Easter.  The lectionary focuses on the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus, the season ending with Ascension and then Pentecost, which ushers in a new season.)

The thinking of the world and the thinking of the church don’t often agree, and it seems as if they are agreeing less and less these days, about all kinds of issues. But one thing we agree on is that Easter is for children. Yes, for children . . . we just disagree about who the children are! In the thinking of the world, Easter is for children because it’s about candy and bunnies and egg hunts and things like that. But for the church, Easter is for children because Easter is about baptism, and baptism – no matter what age you are – is where we are born anew as children of God. St. Paul tells us in Romans (chapter 6) that baptism unites us to Jesus’ death and resurrection – to Good Friday and to Easter – so that dying with Him, dying to sin, we rise with Him, to a new life of grace. A new life as children of God. And so as we heard from St. John today: “what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are.” And so we are. Children of God, loved by God.

But good parents don’t just have children, they raise children. And so it is with our Father in heaven. And so these weeks following our celebration of Easter are about what our baptism means for us; how we live and grow as children of God. Last Sunday in the Introit, we sang: “Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation.” Being a child of God is not the end of the story, but the beginning, of growing up to salvation; of growing in faith and love and righteousness; of not growing away from God – in independence, in freedom, in self-sufficiency – but rather into Him. To be like Him. Like Father, like son.

via St. Athanasius Lutheran Church: Easter 3 Sermon.

Pastor Douthwaite then goes on to explain how that happens.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Pastor Douthwaite’s concluding portion of his sermon: “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.” His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure. What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo. And what He has promised He will deliver. So do not fear, though what you will be has not yet appeared, when Christ appears, you will be like Him. Do not fear, for there is nothing is this world that your Saviour has not conquered. Do not fear, for there is no sin your Saviour will not forgive. Do not fear, for all has been fulfilled. Your Saviour comes to you now not to condemn, but that you grow in His Word; that You grow up in your salvation; that you grow into Him. That you taste and see that the Lord is good. And abide in Him who is alive for you.

    For yes, dear baptized children of God, Christ is risen! [He is risen indeed!] And He is here for you. Alleluia!”

    —-

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Pastor Douthwaite’s concluding portion of his sermon: “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.” His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure. What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo. And what He has promised He will deliver. So do not fear, though what you will be has not yet appeared, when Christ appears, you will be like Him. Do not fear, for there is nothing is this world that your Saviour has not conquered. Do not fear, for there is no sin your Saviour will not forgive. Do not fear, for all has been fulfilled. Your Saviour comes to you now not to condemn, but that you grow in His Word; that You grow up in your salvation; that you grow into Him. That you taste and see that the Lord is good. And abide in Him who is alive for you.

    For yes, dear baptized children of God, Christ is risen! [He is risen indeed!] And He is here for you. Alleluia!”

    —-

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Pastor Douthwaite: “What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo.”

    On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Pastor Douthwaite: “What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo.”

    On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.

  • Grace

    Truth,

    We can be forgiven of our sins, when we fall. We have a mediator, who is Jesus Christ our LORD. Don’t you believe that Believers ask the LORD to forgive them daily of their sins? I sure do! The point being, is asking for forgiveness of our sins.

  • Grace

    Truth,

    We can be forgiven of our sins, when we fall. We have a mediator, who is Jesus Christ our LORD. Don’t you believe that Believers ask the LORD to forgive them daily of their sins? I sure do! The point being, is asking for forgiveness of our sins.

  • Grace

    Acts 1 is all to often forgotten. However it’s one of the most important parts of Scripture.

    1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
    2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
    3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
    4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
    5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

    I have so often wondered what Christ Jesus said to them, what HE preached, what their ears heard. It’s all a mystery, not recorded in Acts. It is a private retreat with the risen Son of God with HIS Apostles.

  • Grace

    Acts 1 is all to often forgotten. However it’s one of the most important parts of Scripture.

    1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
    2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
    3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
    4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
    5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

    I have so often wondered what Christ Jesus said to them, what HE preached, what their ears heard. It’s all a mystery, not recorded in Acts. It is a private retreat with the risen Son of God with HIS Apostles.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD (@2) said:

    On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.

    About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD (@2) said:

    On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.

    About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    What do Confessional Lutherans say that their Lutheran theology teaches about answering that question?

    Further, what does it mean and how does it manifest itself to say that a baptized Lutheran “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    What do Confessional Lutherans say that their Lutheran theology teaches about answering that question?

    Further, what does it mean and how does it manifest itself to say that a baptized Lutheran “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD asked (@6):

    What do Confessional Lutherans say that their Lutheran theology teaches about answering that question?

    Um, that is not how conversations work. If I wanted to ask myself questions and answer them, I certainly wouldn’t need to do it by commenting on a blog. If you want to ignore my question, you can go ahead.

    Further, what does it mean and how does it manifest itself to say that a baptized Lutheran “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    I’m having a hard time knowing what part of that you don’t get. Can you ask something more specific?

    But I can give a vague answer to a vague question. Consider the book of Hebrews. One who didn’t trust in God’s promise to them would be one who (cf. Hebrews 2) didn’t “pay more careful attention”, who “drifted away”, who “ignored such a great salvation”.

    He would be like the people to whom Paul wrote the letter of Galatians, who did not (cf. Galatians 5) “stand firm” but “let [them]selves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery”, such that Christ became “of no value to [them] at all.” Those who “tr[ied] to be justified by law” and so “have been alienated from Christ … fall[ing] away from grace.”

    I could go on.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD asked (@6):

    What do Confessional Lutherans say that their Lutheran theology teaches about answering that question?

    Um, that is not how conversations work. If I wanted to ask myself questions and answer them, I certainly wouldn’t need to do it by commenting on a blog. If you want to ignore my question, you can go ahead.

    Further, what does it mean and how does it manifest itself to say that a baptized Lutheran “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    I’m having a hard time knowing what part of that you don’t get. Can you ask something more specific?

    But I can give a vague answer to a vague question. Consider the book of Hebrews. One who didn’t trust in God’s promise to them would be one who (cf. Hebrews 2) didn’t “pay more careful attention”, who “drifted away”, who “ignored such a great salvation”.

    He would be like the people to whom Paul wrote the letter of Galatians, who did not (cf. Galatians 5) “stand firm” but “let [them]selves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery”, such that Christ became “of no value to [them] at all.” Those who “tr[ied] to be justified by law” and so “have been alienated from Christ … fall[ing] away from grace.”

    I could go on.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “Can you ask something more specific?”

    Alright, here’s an attempt. Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

    If so, what did he/she say which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “Can you ask something more specific?”

    Alright, here’s an attempt. Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

    If so, what did he/she say which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD (@8), so can I safely assume that you’re intent on ignoring my questions to you, even as I answer your questions?

    Anyhow, you said:

    Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

    Perhaps I have, but ultimately, you’re asking me to judge whether someone has faith or not. That’s not mine to judge. Now, a person could outright tell me that they don’t believe in Jesus or that he died to forgive all their sins, but no, I can’t think of any (baptized) Lutherans — you do realize your phrasing is redundant, right? — who have said anything like that to me.

    But what does my own personal, anecdotal experience have to do with anything?

    That is to say: are you going to make a point, or are you just going to keep asking questions of me but ignoring my questions to you?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD (@8), so can I safely assume that you’re intent on ignoring my questions to you, even as I answer your questions?

    Anyhow, you said:

    Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

    Perhaps I have, but ultimately, you’re asking me to judge whether someone has faith or not. That’s not mine to judge. Now, a person could outright tell me that they don’t believe in Jesus or that he died to forgive all their sins, but no, I can’t think of any (baptized) Lutherans — you do realize your phrasing is redundant, right? — who have said anything like that to me.

    But what does my own personal, anecdotal experience have to do with anything?

    That is to say: are you going to make a point, or are you just going to keep asking questions of me but ignoring my questions to you?

  • helen

    They are not likely to tell you they don’t trust God’s promises, if that’s what you want.
    What they are likely to do, is decide they don’t really need to go to church; this or that activity is so much more interesting. And so they get engrossed in things which do not remind them of God, with people who don’t care about God, and one thing leads to another till they can’t find their way back.
    And after that goes on long enough, the devil has got them; though they may look and act like “very nice people” they aren’t God’s people any more. They may even say so.

  • helen

    They are not likely to tell you they don’t trust God’s promises, if that’s what you want.
    What they are likely to do, is decide they don’t really need to go to church; this or that activity is so much more interesting. And so they get engrossed in things which do not remind them of God, with people who don’t care about God, and one thing leads to another till they can’t find their way back.
    And after that goes on long enough, the devil has got them; though they may look and act like “very nice people” they aren’t God’s people any more. They may even say so.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    I’m simply asking you to tell me what it means, and what it looks like to hear about or see a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them.”

    Otherwise, the statement of “they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them [in their baptism]” just sounds like empty, nebulous fluff.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    I’m simply asking you to tell me what it means, and what it looks like to hear about or see a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them.”

    Otherwise, the statement of “they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them [in their baptism]” just sounds like empty, nebulous fluff.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    Helen: “They are not likely to tell you they don’t trust God’s promises, if that’s what you want.

    What they are likely to do, is decide they don’t really need to go to church; this or that activity is so much more interesting. And so they get engrossed in things which do not remind them of God, with people who don’t care about God, and one thing leads to another till they can’t find their way back.

    And after that goes on long enough, the devil has got them; though they may look and act like “very nice people” they aren’t God’s people any more. They may even say so.”

    tODD, do you agree with Helen’s comment?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    Helen: “They are not likely to tell you they don’t trust God’s promises, if that’s what you want.

    What they are likely to do, is decide they don’t really need to go to church; this or that activity is so much more interesting. And so they get engrossed in things which do not remind them of God, with people who don’t care about God, and one thing leads to another till they can’t find their way back.

    And after that goes on long enough, the devil has got them; though they may look and act like “very nice people” they aren’t God’s people any more. They may even say so.”

    tODD, do you agree with Helen’s comment?

  • Grace

    Truth,

    I’m trying to follow this conversation, but alas; you take a comment from one person, ask them again, then take another comment from Helen and ask tODD to answer it.

    What about you, aren’t you going to answer the questions, this isn’t a “moderator” type venue, in which one person decides to direct, re-direct questions.

  • Grace

    Truth,

    I’m trying to follow this conversation, but alas; you take a comment from one person, ask them again, then take another comment from Helen and ask tODD to answer it.

    What about you, aren’t you going to answer the questions, this isn’t a “moderator” type venue, in which one person decides to direct, re-direct questions.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Me: “Further, what does it mean and how does it manifest itself to say that a baptized Lutheran “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    tODD: “Consider the book of Hebrews. One who didn’t trust in God’s promise to them would be one who (cf. Hebrews 2) didn’t “pay more careful attention”, who “drifted away”, who “ignored such a great salvation”.

    Helen: “What they are likely to do, is decide they don’t really need to go to church; this or that activity is so much more interesting. And so they get engrossed in things which do not remind them of God, with people who don’t care about God, and one thing leads to another till they can’t find their way back.

    And after that goes on long enough, the devil has got them; though they may look and act like “very nice people” they aren’t God’s people any more. They may even say so.”

    tODD, do you agree with Helen’s comment? She gives a good description of what it looks like (or might look like) for some baptized Lutherans to have “drifted away” much like the Hebrews passage that you cited.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Me: “Further, what does it mean and how does it manifest itself to say that a baptized Lutheran “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    tODD: “Consider the book of Hebrews. One who didn’t trust in God’s promise to them would be one who (cf. Hebrews 2) didn’t “pay more careful attention”, who “drifted away”, who “ignored such a great salvation”.

    Helen: “What they are likely to do, is decide they don’t really need to go to church; this or that activity is so much more interesting. And so they get engrossed in things which do not remind them of God, with people who don’t care about God, and one thing leads to another till they can’t find their way back.

    And after that goes on long enough, the devil has got them; though they may look and act like “very nice people” they aren’t God’s people any more. They may even say so.”

    tODD, do you agree with Helen’s comment? She gives a good description of what it looks like (or might look like) for some baptized Lutherans to have “drifted away” much like the Hebrews passage that you cited.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD (@11) said:

    Otherwise, the statement of “they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them [in their baptism]” just sounds like empty, nebulous fluff.

    It’s surprising to hear a Christian say that. Do you also think that the Scripture passages I pointed you to (@7) in answer to your questions are “empty, nebulous fluff”?

    You seem intent on tossing a barrage of questions my way, while equally intent on not answering my questions. That is not a conversation. It is, unfortunately, your typical M.O. here. Good luck with that.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD (@11) said:

    Otherwise, the statement of “they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them [in their baptism]” just sounds like empty, nebulous fluff.

    It’s surprising to hear a Christian say that. Do you also think that the Scripture passages I pointed you to (@7) in answer to your questions are “empty, nebulous fluff”?

    You seem intent on tossing a barrage of questions my way, while equally intent on not answering my questions. That is not a conversation. It is, unfortunately, your typical M.O. here. Good luck with that.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    My original point was simply comment #2:

    Pastor Douthwaite: “What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo.”

    On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.

    ——–

    As far as I can tell, no one disagrees with that.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    My original point was simply comment #2:

    Pastor Douthwaite: “What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo.”

    On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.

    ——–

    As far as I can tell, no one disagrees with that.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD, re-read all of #11 again:

    tODD: “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    I’m simply asking you to tell me what it means, and what it looks like to hear about or see a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them.”

    Otherwise, the statement of “they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them [in their baptism]” just sounds like empty, nebulous fluff.
    ——
    Compare your empty, nebulous fluff answer with Helen’s more substantial and concrete comment in #10. See the difference?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD, re-read all of #11 again:

    tODD: “About those who go to Hell — is it because God was not faithful in his promise to them? Or is it because they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them?”

    I’m simply asking you to tell me what it means, and what it looks like to hear about or see a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them.”

    Otherwise, the statement of “they didn’t trust in God’s promise to them [in their baptism]” just sounds like empty, nebulous fluff.
    ——
    Compare your empty, nebulous fluff answer with Helen’s more substantial and concrete comment in #10. See the difference?

  • Grace

    Truth

    What do say regarding tODD’s statement (addressed to you) regarding Galatians 5 in post #7 -

  • Grace

    Truth

    What do say regarding tODD’s statement (addressed to you) regarding Galatians 5 in post #7 -

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Grace, @18,

    I would answer along the lines of #8:

    tODD: “Can you ask something more specific?”

    Answer. Alright, here’s an attempt. Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?

    If so, what did he/she say or do which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Grace, @18,

    I would answer along the lines of #8:

    tODD: “Can you ask something more specific?”

    Answer. Alright, here’s an attempt. Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?

    If so, what did he/she say or do which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?

  • Grace

    Truth @ 19

    You never stated anything, you’re now posting in 19, in post #8 – and now, you are asking a question regarding Galatians 5, instead of commenting on what tODD wrote in #7 regarding Galatians 5, in the first place.

    Truth

    Answer. Alright, here’s an attempt. Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?

    If so, what did he/she say or do which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?”

    Mixing and matching questions with questions isn’t productive!

  • Grace

    Truth @ 19

    You never stated anything, you’re now posting in 19, in post #8 – and now, you are asking a question regarding Galatians 5, instead of commenting on what tODD wrote in #7 regarding Galatians 5, in the first place.

    Truth

    Answer. Alright, here’s an attempt. Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?

    If so, what did he/she say or do which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” via Galatians 5?”

    Mixing and matching questions with questions isn’t productive!

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace (@20), I know we are quite often at odds over, well, most things, but you appear to be acting in my defense here, and I have to say that’s very nice of you. So thanks.

    TUaD does not seem interested in moving this conversation forward, however, so barring any change in his tactics, I’m probably done here.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace (@20), I know we are quite often at odds over, well, most things, but you appear to be acting in my defense here, and I have to say that’s very nice of you. So thanks.

    TUaD does not seem interested in moving this conversation forward, however, so barring any change in his tactics, I’m probably done here.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “Can you ask something more specific?”

    This is a request to ask a more specific question. I have honored the request in #8:

    “Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

    If so, what did he/she say which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?”

    So my more specific question is to ask tODD to be more specific in what a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” looks like. tODD still hasn’t, unlike Helen who did so in #10.

    Therefore, I simply asked tODD if he agreed with Helen given his inability or unwillingness to offer more than an empty, nebulous, fluff answer.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD: “Can you ask something more specific?”

    This is a request to ask a more specific question. I have honored the request in #8:

    “Have you ever met or heard of or read of a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?

    If so, what did he/she say which showed and evidenced that they “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them”?”

    So my more specific question is to ask tODD to be more specific in what a baptized Lutheran who “didn’t trust in God’s promise to them” looks like. tODD still hasn’t, unlike Helen who did so in #10.

    Therefore, I simply asked tODD if he agreed with Helen given his inability or unwillingness to offer more than an empty, nebulous, fluff answer.

  • Helen K

    I just glanced through the back and forths. I was brought up with the doctrine of “eternal security”. Any comments or insights on that? Once saved, always saved. Of course baptismal regeneration is not taught in this persuasion.

  • Helen K

    I just glanced through the back and forths. I was brought up with the doctrine of “eternal security”. Any comments or insights on that? Once saved, always saved. Of course baptismal regeneration is not taught in this persuasion.

  • Grace

    Helen,

    I do not believe in “Eternal Security” for the reason that Galatians and Ephesians 5 – written by Paul, speak contrary to OSAS. There are other passages as well, however, these two chapters, (both 5 in each book) are explicit, against OSAS.

  • Grace

    Helen,

    I do not believe in “Eternal Security” for the reason that Galatians and Ephesians 5 – written by Paul, speak contrary to OSAS. There are other passages as well, however, these two chapters, (both 5 in each book) are explicit, against OSAS.

  • Helen K

    I will have to look up those passages, Grace. I guess I was under the impression that all evangelicals believed that. I used to hear it on Charles Stanley. It was just an accepted teaching in the groups and churches I was a part of all my life….till now. Maybe its a Baptist thing or Calvinistic teaching. Went to a Presbyterian church once and for the first time in my life heard a sermon that reflected their teaching on a limited atonement. I was surprised. Hadn’t heard of that before.

  • Helen K

    I will have to look up those passages, Grace. I guess I was under the impression that all evangelicals believed that. I used to hear it on Charles Stanley. It was just an accepted teaching in the groups and churches I was a part of all my life….till now. Maybe its a Baptist thing or Calvinistic teaching. Went to a Presbyterian church once and for the first time in my life heard a sermon that reflected their teaching on a limited atonement. I was surprised. Hadn’t heard of that before.

  • Tom Hering

    Helen K, we warn one another not to fall away from the faith and be eternally lost, but we also assure one another that all of the elect will certainly be saved. Why do we do both? Because Scripture both warns us and assures us in these ways.

    The LCMS dealt with these questions in the late 19th century, during the controversy over predestination. It’s official position is found in the Thirteen Theses, adopted 1881.

  • Tom Hering

    Helen K, we warn one another not to fall away from the faith and be eternally lost, but we also assure one another that all of the elect will certainly be saved. Why do we do both? Because Scripture both warns us and assures us in these ways.

    The LCMS dealt with these questions in the late 19th century, during the controversy over predestination. It’s official position is found in the Thirteen Theses, adopted 1881.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Tom Hering: “Helen K, we warn one another not to fall away from the faith and be eternally lost, but we also assure one another that all of the elect will certainly be saved.”

    Does this mean that there may be or are some baptized Lutherans who are not numbered among the Elect?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Tom Hering: “Helen K, we warn one another not to fall away from the faith and be eternally lost, but we also assure one another that all of the elect will certainly be saved.”

    Does this mean that there may be or are some baptized Lutherans who are not numbered among the Elect?

  • Tom Hering

    Does this mean that there may be or are some baptized Lutherans who are not numbered among the Elect?

    Why do you want to know?

  • Tom Hering

    Does this mean that there may be or are some baptized Lutherans who are not numbered among the Elect?

    Why do you want to know?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Q: “Does this mean that there may be or are some baptized Lutherans who are not numbered among the Elect?”

    Q: “Why do you want to know?”

    A: Comment #2: “On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Q: “Does this mean that there may be or are some baptized Lutherans who are not numbered among the Elect?”

    Q: “Why do you want to know?”

    A: Comment #2: “On other Cranach threads, Confessional Lutherans have said that a Lutheran can go to Hell after being baptised.”

  • Tom Hering

    Quite simply, we can’t know who is and isn’t among the elect, and so we don’t say some baptized Lutherans aren’t among the elect. We stay far away from all inquiries into the secret things of God. And you should do the same.

  • Tom Hering

    Quite simply, we can’t know who is and isn’t among the elect, and so we don’t say some baptized Lutherans aren’t among the elect. We stay far away from all inquiries into the secret things of God. And you should do the same.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Rev. Martin Luther preached the following to some baptized folks back in the day:

    “Faith takes away sins and puts them to death, so that you might not live in them but in righteousness. Therefore, show by your works and your fruits that there is faith in you. If not, the blood of Christ does not help. If you are a usurer, disobedient, neglectful of your station, then look to see whether you believe. For faith is victorious, triumphant, a conqueror of the world [1 John 5:4]. If you truly believe, you would not commit usury or adultery; you would not be disobedient. Let each one think: I have been made a believer; I have been washed in Baptism with the blood of the Son of God, so that my sins might be dead. [I will] not be disobedient and will declare this with my deeds.” Otherwise, give up the boast of being a believer. You know that you are a disobedient son, an adulterer; do not boast of faith and the blood of Christ. You belong to the devil, the way you are going, etc. You are bringing the name of the Lord into shame and yourself to eternal damnation.

    With such a pastoral warning as this, Rev. Martin Luther is saying that should some baptized folks continue as they are, and to die as they are (“a disobedient son” in various regards) , then they will bring themselves to eternal damnation despite having been baptized.

    Further, a pastor or an undershepherd to His flock will discern who among his flock is “disobedient,” and to then guide or discipline that disobedient, wayward sheep back among the flock. And to do that, the pastor/undershepherd has to identify and judge and inform the disobedient sheep that they are disobedient.

    The disobedient sheep may bleat in protest: “I have been baptized.”

    Rev. Martin Luther: “You are bringing the name of the Lord into shame and yourself to eternal damnation.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Rev. Martin Luther preached the following to some baptized folks back in the day:

    “Faith takes away sins and puts them to death, so that you might not live in them but in righteousness. Therefore, show by your works and your fruits that there is faith in you. If not, the blood of Christ does not help. If you are a usurer, disobedient, neglectful of your station, then look to see whether you believe. For faith is victorious, triumphant, a conqueror of the world [1 John 5:4]. If you truly believe, you would not commit usury or adultery; you would not be disobedient. Let each one think: I have been made a believer; I have been washed in Baptism with the blood of the Son of God, so that my sins might be dead. [I will] not be disobedient and will declare this with my deeds.” Otherwise, give up the boast of being a believer. You know that you are a disobedient son, an adulterer; do not boast of faith and the blood of Christ. You belong to the devil, the way you are going, etc. You are bringing the name of the Lord into shame and yourself to eternal damnation.

    With such a pastoral warning as this, Rev. Martin Luther is saying that should some baptized folks continue as they are, and to die as they are (“a disobedient son” in various regards) , then they will bring themselves to eternal damnation despite having been baptized.

    Further, a pastor or an undershepherd to His flock will discern who among his flock is “disobedient,” and to then guide or discipline that disobedient, wayward sheep back among the flock. And to do that, the pastor/undershepherd has to identify and judge and inform the disobedient sheep that they are disobedient.

    The disobedient sheep may bleat in protest: “I have been baptized.”

    Rev. Martin Luther: “You are bringing the name of the Lord into shame and yourself to eternal damnation.”

  • Tom Hering

    You really don’t understand how “I am baptized!” is a statement of faith, do you? You think because some people (do you actually know any??) make this statement apart from faith, the promise God makes in baptism is null and void. God and His promises don’t change, even though a baptized person rejects Him and his promises. If they’re lost, it’s by their own choice and doing. Their baptism still stands, and they can return to it at any time.

  • Tom Hering

    You really don’t understand how “I am baptized!” is a statement of faith, do you? You think because some people (do you actually know any??) make this statement apart from faith, the promise God makes in baptism is null and void. God and His promises don’t change, even though a baptized person rejects Him and his promises. If they’re lost, it’s by their own choice and doing. Their baptism still stands, and they can return to it at any time.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    The disobedient sheep may bleat in protest: “I have been baptized.”

    Rev. Martin Luther: “You are bringing the name of the Lord into shame and yourself to eternal damnation.”

    Disobedient sheep: “You really don’t understand how “I am baptized!” is a statement of faith, do you?”

    Rev. Martin Luther: “[S]how by your works and your fruits that there is faith in you. If not, the blood of Christ does not help. If you are a usurer, disobedient, neglectful of your station, then look to see whether you believe. Otherwise, give up the boast of being a believer. You know that you are a disobedient son, an adulterer; do not boast of faith and the blood of Christ. You belong to the devil, the way you are going, etc.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    The disobedient sheep may bleat in protest: “I have been baptized.”

    Rev. Martin Luther: “You are bringing the name of the Lord into shame and yourself to eternal damnation.”

    Disobedient sheep: “You really don’t understand how “I am baptized!” is a statement of faith, do you?”

    Rev. Martin Luther: “[S]how by your works and your fruits that there is faith in you. If not, the blood of Christ does not help. If you are a usurer, disobedient, neglectful of your station, then look to see whether you believe. Otherwise, give up the boast of being a believer. You know that you are a disobedient son, an adulterer; do not boast of faith and the blood of Christ. You belong to the devil, the way you are going, etc.”

  • trotk

    Truth, the ax that you are grinding should more properly be taken up with Paul and Peter. Quit worrying about the Lutherans (although I, as a baptized Anglican, feel somewhat left out of the conversation because I take it as a good thing to be challenged by your repetitive questions) and ask the apostles why they bothered to always describe baptism as efficacious.

  • trotk

    Truth, the ax that you are grinding should more properly be taken up with Paul and Peter. Quit worrying about the Lutherans (although I, as a baptized Anglican, feel somewhat left out of the conversation because I take it as a good thing to be challenged by your repetitive questions) and ask the apostles why they bothered to always describe baptism as efficacious.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Trotk,

    Are you an Episcopalian in The Episcopal Church?

    I’m glad that you think it’s a good thing to be challenged.

    In Martin Luther’s sermon that was referenced above, did Martin Luther think that baptism was always efficacious; “always efficacious” in terms that anyone who is baptized is numbered among the Elect?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Trotk,

    Are you an Episcopalian in The Episcopal Church?

    I’m glad that you think it’s a good thing to be challenged.

    In Martin Luther’s sermon that was referenced above, did Martin Luther think that baptism was always efficacious; “always efficacious” in terms that anyone who is baptized is numbered among the Elect?

  • trotk

    Truth, you remind me of the woman at the well. Whenever anyone says something uncomfortable or something that your tiny view of God and the scriptures can’t handle, you respond with a diversionary question.

    My parenthetical note above was facetious. Of course it is a good thing to be challenged, but you don’t challenge any of the people here. The only thing we hear you challenging is the Word of God.

    Get it through your head that the Word of God is bigger than your little head. Your issue is not with Lutherans, or Anglicans, or Episcopalians or any other group. Your issue is with the Word of God, which states simply that our baptism has saved us and that we are to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (how does your little reformed head handle that!!?) and that we are buried into the death of Christ through baptism and I could go on here with many verses, etc.

    Why do you insist on denying the Word? You are taking the devil’s path.

  • trotk

    Truth, you remind me of the woman at the well. Whenever anyone says something uncomfortable or something that your tiny view of God and the scriptures can’t handle, you respond with a diversionary question.

    My parenthetical note above was facetious. Of course it is a good thing to be challenged, but you don’t challenge any of the people here. The only thing we hear you challenging is the Word of God.

    Get it through your head that the Word of God is bigger than your little head. Your issue is not with Lutherans, or Anglicans, or Episcopalians or any other group. Your issue is with the Word of God, which states simply that our baptism has saved us and that we are to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (how does your little reformed head handle that!!?) and that we are buried into the death of Christ through baptism and I could go on here with many verses, etc.

    Why do you insist on denying the Word? You are taking the devil’s path.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Trotk,

    Examining Lutheran theology on its own terms of internal consistency is a worthwhile exercise.

    (1) Confessional Lutherans: “Baptism now saves you.”

    (2) Confessional Lutherans: “A baptised Lutheran can still go to Hell.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Trotk,

    Examining Lutheran theology on its own terms of internal consistency is a worthwhile exercise.

    (1) Confessional Lutherans: “Baptism now saves you.”

    (2) Confessional Lutherans: “A baptised Lutheran can still go to Hell.”

  • trotk

    Like I said, diversionary tactics.

    Q: How does Truth deal with the fact that he denies Scripture?

    A: He attacks another denomination.

  • trotk

    Like I said, diversionary tactics.

    Q: How does Truth deal with the fact that he denies Scripture?

    A: He attacks another denomination.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Trotk,

    Resorting to ad hominem merely reflects the lack of cogent Biblical thinking on your part.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Trotk,

    Resorting to ad hominem merely reflects the lack of cogent Biblical thinking on your part.

  • trotk

    Another diversion!

    What was the ad hominem, by the way?

  • trotk

    Another diversion!

    What was the ad hominem, by the way?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Helen K.: “I was brought up with the doctrine of “eternal security”. Any comments or insights on that? Once saved, always saved. Of course baptismal regeneration is not taught in this persuasion.”

    Would Confessional Lutherans say that baptismal regeneration does not provide “eternal security”?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Helen K.: “I was brought up with the doctrine of “eternal security”. Any comments or insights on that? Once saved, always saved. Of course baptismal regeneration is not taught in this persuasion.”

    Would Confessional Lutherans say that baptismal regeneration does not provide “eternal security”?

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 33. So now anyone who says in faith – in faith – “I am baptized!” is a disobedient sheep. According to someone who implies (@ 39) he’s a cogent biblical thinker. Heck, this guy can’t even understand the point Luther was making (@ 31). And we’re supposed to believe he’s got the Word of God figured out?

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 33. So now anyone who says in faith – in faith – “I am baptized!” is a disobedient sheep. According to someone who implies (@ 39) he’s a cogent biblical thinker. Heck, this guy can’t even understand the point Luther was making (@ 31). And we’re supposed to believe he’s got the Word of God figured out?

  • Tom Hering

    TUAD, could you drop all the twisty little questions and just come straight out with it and make whatever point it is you really want to make? Or don’t you have one you can outline and defend?

  • Tom Hering

    TUAD, could you drop all the twisty little questions and just come straight out with it and make whatever point it is you really want to make? Or don’t you have one you can outline and defend?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Examining Lutheran theology on its own terms of internal consistency is a worthwhile exercise.

    (1) Confessional Lutherans: “Baptism now saves you.”

    (2) Confessional Lutherans: “A baptised Lutheran can still go to Hell.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Examining Lutheran theology on its own terms of internal consistency is a worthwhile exercise.

    (1) Confessional Lutherans: “Baptism now saves you.”

    (2) Confessional Lutherans: “A baptised Lutheran can still go to Hell.”

  • Tom Hering

    Scripture: Baptism now saves you.

    Scripture: You have fallen from grace.

    Wow! Scripture is internally inconsistent!

  • Tom Hering

    Scripture: Baptism now saves you.

    Scripture: You have fallen from grace.

    Wow! Scripture is internally inconsistent!

  • trotk

    Truth, was it because I called your head small? Or because I accused you of the devil’s work? Or because I compared you to the woman at the well?

    Q (trotk): What was the ad hominem?
    A (truth): An accusation I tossed to avoid answering why I deny Scripture.

  • trotk

    Truth, was it because I called your head small? Or because I accused you of the devil’s work? Or because I compared you to the woman at the well?

    Q (trotk): What was the ad hominem?
    A (truth): An accusation I tossed to avoid answering why I deny Scripture.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    A most enjoyable and enlightening thread. Thank you all.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    A most enjoyable and enlightening thread. Thank you all.

  • Tom Hering

    Chicken.

  • Tom Hering

    Chicken.

  • trotk

    You opened your mouth, Truth. Don’t blame us for the consequences.

  • trotk

    You opened your mouth, Truth. Don’t blame us for the consequences.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@45), you’ve got TUaD’s problem in a nutshell right there! He keeps blaming Lutherans for his inability to understand those two passages of Scripture together.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@45), you’ve got TUaD’s problem in a nutshell right there! He keeps blaming Lutherans for his inability to understand those two passages of Scripture together.

  • Tom Hering

    Todd, I think TUAD’s problem is that he is, indeed, trying to understand them together, i.e., to reconcile them. How can Baptism save me if I can fall from grace, or, how can I fall from grace if Baptism saves me? How can God’s promise to me in Baptism be true?

    He doesn’t see how it’s all a matter of faith – of trusting Baptism has saved you, and trusting you’re one of the elect, only because God’s Word assures you of both things. Yet at the same time trembling because you know you can fall away, which God’s Word warns you can happen. Faith believes this warning, too.

    So, we Lutherans don’t even try to reconcile these biblical statements of assurance and warning. We just accept them, both, at the same time. By faith.

    The churchgoers Luther tried to sting with his words didn’t believe either Scriptures’ warnings about sin or Scriptures’ assurances concerning Baptism and election. They had no faith, as evidenced by their haughtiness as sinners (not by the mere fact they were sinners). Yet God’s promise to them in Baptism remained effectual. They had only to grasp that promise by faith, and repent. Luther made sure the Law did all it could for them by accusing them, just as he made sure they heard the Gospel, by which their faith might be revived. If any of them refused all of that, it was by their own will and doing.

  • Tom Hering

    Todd, I think TUAD’s problem is that he is, indeed, trying to understand them together, i.e., to reconcile them. How can Baptism save me if I can fall from grace, or, how can I fall from grace if Baptism saves me? How can God’s promise to me in Baptism be true?

    He doesn’t see how it’s all a matter of faith – of trusting Baptism has saved you, and trusting you’re one of the elect, only because God’s Word assures you of both things. Yet at the same time trembling because you know you can fall away, which God’s Word warns you can happen. Faith believes this warning, too.

    So, we Lutherans don’t even try to reconcile these biblical statements of assurance and warning. We just accept them, both, at the same time. By faith.

    The churchgoers Luther tried to sting with his words didn’t believe either Scriptures’ warnings about sin or Scriptures’ assurances concerning Baptism and election. They had no faith, as evidenced by their haughtiness as sinners (not by the mere fact they were sinners). Yet God’s promise to them in Baptism remained effectual. They had only to grasp that promise by faith, and repent. Luther made sure the Law did all it could for them by accusing them, just as he made sure they heard the Gospel, by which their faith might be revived. If any of them refused all of that, it was by their own will and doing.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Thank you Mr. Hering for #51.

    “Yet God’s promise to them in Baptism remained effectual. They had only to grasp that promise by faith, and repent. Luther made sure the Law did all it could for them by accusing them, just as he made sure they heard the Gospel, by which their faith might be revived. If any of them refused all of that, it was by their own will and doing.

    So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran “by their own will and doing” can nullify the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

    Man’s will and doing > God’s Will and Doing.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Thank you Mr. Hering for #51.

    “Yet God’s promise to them in Baptism remained effectual. They had only to grasp that promise by faith, and repent. Luther made sure the Law did all it could for them by accusing them, just as he made sure they heard the Gospel, by which their faith might be revived. If any of them refused all of that, it was by their own will and doing.

    So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran “by their own will and doing” can nullify the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

    Man’s will and doing > God’s Will and Doing.

  • trotk

    Truth, sometimes I let my kids do things that I don’t will that they do. It isn’t that their will is greater than mine, but I do turn them over to their own devices at times because of some greater reason. But Tom is right, we should take this on faith, rather than make it fit our reason. Even if it was unthinkable, as you seem to think, we should take the words of Scripture on faith.

    I only offer a human example to help you understand.

  • trotk

    Truth, sometimes I let my kids do things that I don’t will that they do. It isn’t that their will is greater than mine, but I do turn them over to their own devices at times because of some greater reason. But Tom is right, we should take this on faith, rather than make it fit our reason. Even if it was unthinkable, as you seem to think, we should take the words of Scripture on faith.

    I only offer a human example to help you understand.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    If a baptised Lutheran ends up in Hell, then according to Lutheran theology, doesn’t that show that that baptised Lutheran’s will and doing is greater than God’s Will and Doing which was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    If a baptised Lutheran ends up in Hell, then according to Lutheran theology, doesn’t that show that that baptised Lutheran’s will and doing is greater than God’s Will and Doing which was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD said (@52):

    Man’s will and doing > God’s Will and Doing.

    Trotk has already addressed the deficiencies with this phrasing. Have you not noticed that God allows us to do things he also tells us he doesn’t want?

    Does God want us to sin? Does God want anyone to perish? … And yet, do people sin? Do people perish?

    That God allows this does not make him subject to man’s will. But then, this is purely an argument from reason. Notably lacking in your arguments (when you actually make them), TUaD, is the presence of Scripture.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TUaD said (@52):

    Man’s will and doing > God’s Will and Doing.

    Trotk has already addressed the deficiencies with this phrasing. Have you not noticed that God allows us to do things he also tells us he doesn’t want?

    Does God want us to sin? Does God want anyone to perish? … And yet, do people sin? Do people perish?

    That God allows this does not make him subject to man’s will. But then, this is purely an argument from reason. Notably lacking in your arguments (when you actually make them), TUaD, is the presence of Scripture.

  • Grace

    Truth“If a baptised Lutheran ends up in Hell, then according to Lutheran theology, doesn’t that show that that baptised Lutheran’s will and doing is greater than God’s Will and Doing which was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran?

    Without using Lutheran Theology – What Scripture would you use, to substantiate either belief?

  • Grace

    Truth“If a baptised Lutheran ends up in Hell, then according to Lutheran theology, doesn’t that show that that baptised Lutheran’s will and doing is greater than God’s Will and Doing which was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran?

    Without using Lutheran Theology – What Scripture would you use, to substantiate either belief?

  • Helen K

    @26 Tom Hering. Thank you so very much for the link. I have not seen it before and I want to examine it in depth. Years and years ago (in my 20′s) I had a real struggle with belief. And much of it hinged on the doctrine of predestination and election. I talked to about three pastors of different denominations over the course of as many years.

    During that time my husband and I attended a Lutheran church for awhile and became friends with a young fellow who had been exposed to Campus Crusades in college or some such. I recall asking him if he planned on leaving his Lutheran Church (not LCMS) and he said no, that he would remain and work within his own denomination.

    What he did say was that in all his years of catechism (sp) and Sunday School, he never heard that one could have a personal relationship with Jesus. He missed that. I was a little saddened as I was drawn to the Lutheran way of worship and the liturgy. My husband did not care for the rather formal and structured Lutheran services and so we finally went to another church.

    As a child I wasn’t acquainted with baptist type teaching so much-that came later in life. Of course I was taught that baptism doesn’t save an individual, but faith in Christ for the remission of sins. But you guys all know about “decision” theology. I was brought up on that.

    In questioning my childhood pastor’s wife years lager, she tried to explain a harmony between predestination, election, and the foreknowlege of God. Some of my problem was the question of what would become of people and tribes who had never heard of Jesus as such. Would they automatically wind up in Hell.

    I hope my post comes through in normal size font..in looking at the “preview”, a portion of what I have written almost requires a magnifying glass. Please forgive me. I’m not very competant with my computer.

  • Helen K

    @26 Tom Hering. Thank you so very much for the link. I have not seen it before and I want to examine it in depth. Years and years ago (in my 20′s) I had a real struggle with belief. And much of it hinged on the doctrine of predestination and election. I talked to about three pastors of different denominations over the course of as many years.

    During that time my husband and I attended a Lutheran church for awhile and became friends with a young fellow who had been exposed to Campus Crusades in college or some such. I recall asking him if he planned on leaving his Lutheran Church (not LCMS) and he said no, that he would remain and work within his own denomination.

    What he did say was that in all his years of catechism (sp) and Sunday School, he never heard that one could have a personal relationship with Jesus. He missed that. I was a little saddened as I was drawn to the Lutheran way of worship and the liturgy. My husband did not care for the rather formal and structured Lutheran services and so we finally went to another church.

    As a child I wasn’t acquainted with baptist type teaching so much-that came later in life. Of course I was taught that baptism doesn’t save an individual, but faith in Christ for the remission of sins. But you guys all know about “decision” theology. I was brought up on that.

    In questioning my childhood pastor’s wife years lager, she tried to explain a harmony between predestination, election, and the foreknowlege of God. Some of my problem was the question of what would become of people and tribes who had never heard of Jesus as such. Would they automatically wind up in Hell.

    I hope my post comes through in normal size font..in looking at the “preview”, a portion of what I have written almost requires a magnifying glass. Please forgive me. I’m not very competant with my computer.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” (Jesus in John 10:27-30)

    So if one becomes God’s child/sheep by baptism… he/she will never perish or should never perish.

    Yet with Lutheran theology it seems to read thusly:

    “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me until they don’t; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish unless they unrepentantly sin bad enough; and no one except maybe themselves will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and yet only they are able to snatch themselves out of the Father’s hand if they choose to. I and the Father are one.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” (Jesus in John 10:27-30)

    So if one becomes God’s child/sheep by baptism… he/she will never perish or should never perish.

    Yet with Lutheran theology it seems to read thusly:

    “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me until they don’t; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish unless they unrepentantly sin bad enough; and no one except maybe themselves will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and yet only they are able to snatch themselves out of the Father’s hand if they choose to. I and the Father are one.”

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Helen K: “What he [a Lutheran] did say was that in all his years of catechism (sp) and Sunday School, he never heard that one could have a personal relationship with Jesus. He missed that.”

    I wonder if other Lutherans have had the same experience as this fellow.

    “Of course I was taught that baptism doesn’t save an individual, but faith in Christ for the remission of sins.”

    I’m glad that you remember this teaching.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Helen K: “What he [a Lutheran] did say was that in all his years of catechism (sp) and Sunday School, he never heard that one could have a personal relationship with Jesus. He missed that.”

    I wonder if other Lutherans have had the same experience as this fellow.

    “Of course I was taught that baptism doesn’t save an individual, but faith in Christ for the remission of sins.”

    I’m glad that you remember this teaching.

  • Grace

    The passage below is very explicit as to God dwelling in us and we in Him, it’s a “personal relationship” with our LORD.

    13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.

    14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.

    15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

    1 John 4

    God dwelling in a Believer – that’s a very personal relationship indeed. (verses 13 and 15)

  • Grace

    The passage below is very explicit as to God dwelling in us and we in Him, it’s a “personal relationship” with our LORD.

    13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.

    14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.

    15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

    1 John 4

    God dwelling in a Believer – that’s a very personal relationship indeed. (verses 13 and 15)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Again, TUaD (@58), your issue is not with “Lutheran theology”, but with the passages of Scripture that have already been referred to, which teach that one can fall away from grace. It is these you deny with your reason.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Again, TUaD (@58), your issue is not with “Lutheran theology”, but with the passages of Scripture that have already been referred to, which teach that one can fall away from grace. It is these you deny with your reason.

  • Grace

    Truth

    Almost all of us, without exception have stated our church affiliation, it would be nice, if you as well, stated yours. I see no reason to keep ones church a secret, or simply say it’s a Bible Church. Every church has a doctrine, that gives anyone an idea of what they do and don’t believe.

    I’m aware of churches, that I agree very much with, even my own, but yet disagree on several points.

  • Grace

    Truth

    Almost all of us, without exception have stated our church affiliation, it would be nice, if you as well, stated yours. I see no reason to keep ones church a secret, or simply say it’s a Bible Church. Every church has a doctrine, that gives anyone an idea of what they do and don’t believe.

    I’m aware of churches, that I agree very much with, even my own, but yet disagree on several points.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD, #55, 61: “Have you not noticed that God allows us to do things he also tells us he doesn’t want? [Y]our issue is not with “Lutheran theology”, but with the passages of Scripture that have already been referred to, which teach that one can fall away from grace.”

    So then God, although He doesn’t want to, allows unrepentant, disobedient, baptized Lutherans to fall away from grace and into Hell.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    tODD, #55, 61: “Have you not noticed that God allows us to do things he also tells us he doesn’t want? [Y]our issue is not with “Lutheran theology”, but with the passages of Scripture that have already been referred to, which teach that one can fall away from grace.”

    So then God, although He doesn’t want to, allows unrepentant, disobedient, baptized Lutherans to fall away from grace and into Hell.

  • Grace

    Paul speaks to Believers. Read verse five – there is no inheritance when a Believer continues to sin. These individuals were Christian Believers that Paul was addressing, they were not un-Believers. Verse three clearly states they are Believers by calling them “saints” but then read verse five. Believers are “saints” –

    1 Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;

    2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.

    3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

    4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

    5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

    6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

    7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

    8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:. Ephesians 5

    Obviously they are Believers, and “saints” they were once in darkness. but having read verse five (5) the stark reality: “hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

    inheritance Strong’s Greek

    kleronomia – klay-ron-om-ee’-ah

    heirship, i.e. (concretely) a patrimony or (genitive case) a possession:–inheritance.

  • Grace

    Paul speaks to Believers. Read verse five – there is no inheritance when a Believer continues to sin. These individuals were Christian Believers that Paul was addressing, they were not un-Believers. Verse three clearly states they are Believers by calling them “saints” but then read verse five. Believers are “saints” –

    1 Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;

    2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.

    3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

    4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

    5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

    6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

    7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

    8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:. Ephesians 5

    Obviously they are Believers, and “saints” they were once in darkness. but having read verse five (5) the stark reality: “hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

    inheritance Strong’s Greek

    kleronomia – klay-ron-om-ee’-ah

    heirship, i.e. (concretely) a patrimony or (genitive case) a possession:–inheritance.

  • Grace

    This chapter, as well as others are very important. I have posted in the past regarding this subject, Eternal Security (OSAS) but AGAIN, the timing of this subject is pivotal to this discussion.

    Here Paul is speaking to BELIEVERS, and he lists the sins – and in verse 21 Paul says “I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

    Reading this, you can see this WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME that Paul had WARNED THEM.

    They were Believers, and THE REASON, Paul was NOT telling them how to be SAVED, to obtain Salvation, but he was WARNING BELIEVERS what would happen if they went BACK into sin. It was a WARNING.

    Galatians Chapter 5

    16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

    17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

    18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;Adultery fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

    20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

    21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians Chapter 5

    inherit

    kleronomeo – klay-ron-om-eh’-o

    to be an heir to (literally or figuratively):–be heir, (obtain by) inherit(-ance).

    Look closely at the last verse, and remember, Paul is speaking to Believers, and he is WARNING them that if they do these things they will not inherit the kingdom of God. Paul also reminds them that he has told them BEFORE and time past.

    The POINT IS; If they were NOT Believers, they would be going to hell, no matter how many sins, or what sins they committed, OR, what they did or didn’t do.

  • Grace

    This chapter, as well as others are very important. I have posted in the past regarding this subject, Eternal Security (OSAS) but AGAIN, the timing of this subject is pivotal to this discussion.

    Here Paul is speaking to BELIEVERS, and he lists the sins – and in verse 21 Paul says “I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

    Reading this, you can see this WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME that Paul had WARNED THEM.

    They were Believers, and THE REASON, Paul was NOT telling them how to be SAVED, to obtain Salvation, but he was WARNING BELIEVERS what would happen if they went BACK into sin. It was a WARNING.

    Galatians Chapter 5

    16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

    17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

    18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;Adultery fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

    20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

    21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians Chapter 5

    inherit

    kleronomeo – klay-ron-om-eh’-o

    to be an heir to (literally or figuratively):–be heir, (obtain by) inherit(-ance).

    Look closely at the last verse, and remember, Paul is speaking to Believers, and he is WARNING them that if they do these things they will not inherit the kingdom of God. Paul also reminds them that he has told them BEFORE and time past.

    The POINT IS; If they were NOT Believers, they would be going to hell, no matter how many sins, or what sins they committed, OR, what they did or didn’t do.

  • Tom Hering

    TUAD @ 52. So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran “by their own will and doing” can nullify the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism …

    Nope. The promise of salvation remains, and God always has the desire and the power to fulfill it. But His promise can be rejected in a number of ways – as can all the saving promises of Scripture.

    Do you think we teach that Baptism makes people incapable of falling from grace? Or is it that you think we should teach that believers, once saved, are always saved – but they’re not ever saved by Baptism? Am I getting close to what you won’t, for some reason, state openly?

  • Tom Hering

    TUAD @ 52. So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran “by their own will and doing” can nullify the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism …

    Nope. The promise of salvation remains, and God always has the desire and the power to fulfill it. But His promise can be rejected in a number of ways – as can all the saving promises of Scripture.

    Do you think we teach that Baptism makes people incapable of falling from grace? Or is it that you think we should teach that believers, once saved, are always saved – but they’re not ever saved by Baptism? Am I getting close to what you won’t, for some reason, state openly?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    #51: “Yet God’s promise to them in Baptism remained effectual. They had only to grasp that promise by faith, and repent. Luther made sure the Law did all it could for them by accusing them, just as he made sure they heard the Gospel, by which their faith might be revived. If any of them refused all of that, it was by their own will and doing.“

    So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran who ends up in Hell “by their own will and doing” has nullified the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    #51: “Yet God’s promise to them in Baptism remained effectual. They had only to grasp that promise by faith, and repent. Luther made sure the Law did all it could for them by accusing them, just as he made sure they heard the Gospel, by which their faith might be revived. If any of them refused all of that, it was by their own will and doing.“

    So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran who ends up in Hell “by their own will and doing” has nullified the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

  • Tom Hering

    TUAD, get this: you don’t win an argument by repeatedly changing the meaning of your opponent’s words. You instead offer an actual counter-argument. If you can.

  • Tom Hering

    TUAD, get this: you don’t win an argument by repeatedly changing the meaning of your opponent’s words. You instead offer an actual counter-argument. If you can.

  • Grace

    Truth @ 67

    The last paragraph, written as a question; again, and again, over other threads, as well as this one – you ask the same question, r e w o r d e d – -

    What is your goal?

    Why won’t you answer questions, including your church affiliation?

  • Grace

    Truth @ 67

    The last paragraph, written as a question; again, and again, over other threads, as well as this one – you ask the same question, r e w o r d e d – -

    What is your goal?

    Why won’t you answer questions, including your church affiliation?

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Tom Hering: “Do you think we teach that Baptism makes people incapable of falling from grace?”

    Hard to say.

    Pastor Douthwaite’s sermon: “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.” His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure. What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo. And what He has promised He will deliver.”

    o “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.”

    o His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure.

    o What He has given He will not take back.

    o What He has done He will not undo.

    o And what He has promised He will deliver.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Tom Hering: “Do you think we teach that Baptism makes people incapable of falling from grace?”

    Hard to say.

    Pastor Douthwaite’s sermon: “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.” His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure. What He has given He will not take back. What He has done He will not undo. And what He has promised He will deliver.”

    o “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.”

    o His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure.

    o What He has given He will not take back.

    o What He has done He will not undo.

    o And what He has promised He will deliver.

  • Tom Hering

    o “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.”

    Yes, the baptized are.

    o His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure.

    Yes, He never breaks His promises, and His faithfulness is forever.

    o What He has given He will not take back.

    Yes, see above.

    o What He has done He will not undo.

    Yes, see above again.

    o And what He has promised He will deliver.

    Yes, as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow.

    But none of this means that baptized men can’t reject Him, or His promises, or what He has given, or what He has done. You don’t understand this because you believe in “once saved, always saved.” Your just too afraid to say so on this blog.

  • Tom Hering

    o “And so “beloved,” as St. John said, “we are God’s children now.”

    Yes, the baptized are.

    o His baptismal promise and faithfulness is sure.

    Yes, He never breaks His promises, and His faithfulness is forever.

    o What He has given He will not take back.

    Yes, see above.

    o What He has done He will not undo.

    Yes, see above again.

    o And what He has promised He will deliver.

    Yes, as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow.

    But none of this means that baptized men can’t reject Him, or His promises, or what He has given, or what He has done. You don’t understand this because you believe in “once saved, always saved.” Your just too afraid to say so on this blog.

  • Tom Hering

    Or, you’re here to evangelize Lutherans, and convince them of your beliefs. But, like a Mormon who believes he has a holy right to lie when it comes to evangelization, you refuse to be open and honest with us about your beliefs.

  • Tom Hering

    Or, you’re here to evangelize Lutherans, and convince them of your beliefs. But, like a Mormon who believes he has a holy right to lie when it comes to evangelization, you refuse to be open and honest with us about your beliefs.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    It would be interesting to know if Pastor Douthwaite has preached to his congregation or taught his parishioners that a baptized Lutheran can still end up in Hell.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    It would be interesting to know if Pastor Douthwaite has preached to his congregation or taught his parishioners that a baptized Lutheran can still end up in Hell.

  • Tom Hering

    It would be interesting to know why you’re such a twit.

  • Tom Hering

    It would be interesting to know why you’re such a twit.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@74), yes, I snorted when I read that, but I’m pretty sure you’re only feeding TUaD’s martyr complex, or whatever it is that compels him to type things here (I won’t go so far as to describe it as “engaging in discussion”).

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@74), yes, I snorted when I read that, but I’m pretty sure you’re only feeding TUaD’s martyr complex, or whatever it is that compels him to type things here (I won’t go so far as to describe it as “engaging in discussion”).

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Tom Hering: “But none of this means that baptized men can’t reject Him, or His promises, or what He has given, or what He has done.”

    So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran who ends up in Hell has nullified the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Tom Hering: “But none of this means that baptized men can’t reject Him, or His promises, or what He has given, or what He has done.”

    So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran who ends up in Hell has nullified the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Hey TUaD, do you think that if you keep asking the same questions over and over, you’ll eventually get the answer you want to hear? Why don’t you just save us all the effort of reading your tiresome rehashing and type what it is you want to hear?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Hey TUaD, do you think that if you keep asking the same questions over and over, you’ll eventually get the answer you want to hear? Why don’t you just save us all the effort of reading your tiresome rehashing and type what it is you want to hear?

  • Tom Hering

    Yeah, like, what you yourself believe about all this, TUAD. You can’t really be as chickensh*t as I’m convinced you are at this point.

  • Tom Hering

    Yeah, like, what you yourself believe about all this, TUAD. You can’t really be as chickensh*t as I’m convinced you are at this point.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Given: Examining Lutheran theology on its own terms of internal consistency is a worthwhile exercise.

    (1) Confessional Lutherans: “Baptism now saves you.”

    (2) Confessional Lutherans: “A baptised Lutheran can still go to Hell.”

    Then #63 and #76:

    o So then God, although He doesn’t want to, allows unrepentant, disobedient, baptized Lutherans to fall away from grace and into Hell.

    o So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran who ends up in Hell has nullified the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    Given: Examining Lutheran theology on its own terms of internal consistency is a worthwhile exercise.

    (1) Confessional Lutherans: “Baptism now saves you.”

    (2) Confessional Lutherans: “A baptised Lutheran can still go to Hell.”

    Then #63 and #76:

    o So then God, although He doesn’t want to, allows unrepentant, disobedient, baptized Lutherans to fall away from grace and into Hell.

    o So an unrepentant, disobedient baptized Lutheran who ends up in Hell has nullified the efficacious power, promise, and work of God that was done in the sacramental baptism of the unrepentant, disobedient Lutheran.

  • Tom Hering

    Cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck.

  • Tom Hering

    Cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck.

  • Tom Hering

    Found this over at Beggars All:

    Truth Unites… and Divides said…

    Justin: “What is the point of constantly bringing Lutherans to the say the same thing over and over?”

    (1) Not all baptized Lutherans are aware that a baptized Lutheran can go to Hell. They think their baptism saves them.

    (2) The nature and understanding and teaching on the meaning of the theological term “regeneration.”

    Lutherans teach that it can be a temporal effect.

    Others teach that regeneration lasts throughout life. And cannot be lost.
    3:59 PM, February 16, 2012

    That’s about as close as we’re ever gonna get, I think, to an honest statement from TUAD about what he believes.

  • Tom Hering

    Found this over at Beggars All:

    Truth Unites… and Divides said…

    Justin: “What is the point of constantly bringing Lutherans to the say the same thing over and over?”

    (1) Not all baptized Lutherans are aware that a baptized Lutheran can go to Hell. They think their baptism saves them.

    (2) The nature and understanding and teaching on the meaning of the theological term “regeneration.”

    Lutherans teach that it can be a temporal effect.

    Others teach that regeneration lasts throughout life. And cannot be lost.
    3:59 PM, February 16, 2012

    That’s about as close as we’re ever gonna get, I think, to an honest statement from TUAD about what he believes.

  • Grace

    Tom, ……. thanks!

    Go to the LINK below from Beggars All – very educational indeed!

    Start at the top, and read some of this stuff.

    This is James Swan’s blog, for those who don’t know.

    http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2012/02/luther-coined-term-antinomian.html

  • Grace

    Tom, ……. thanks!

    Go to the LINK below from Beggars All – very educational indeed!

    Start at the top, and read some of this stuff.

    This is James Swan’s blog, for those who don’t know.

    http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2012/02/luther-coined-term-antinomian.html

  • Tom Hering

    Yes, people on at least two other blogs have found it’s impossible to have a real discussion with TUAD. So I suggest we just have fun with him from now on.

  • Tom Hering

    Yes, people on at least two other blogs have found it’s impossible to have a real discussion with TUAD. So I suggest we just have fun with him from now on.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    (From the comment thread at Beggars All)

    James,

    Wow! That article by D. Patrick Ramsey was terrific! Thanks for referring me to it!

    Very insightful and well-researched and well-argued.

    Here’s one passage (among many) that stood out:

    “A related problem is that Luther’s view of the efficacy of baptism is in tension with his belief that baptism signifies and accomplishes full and complete justification. This tension is created by the fact that baptized people apostatize. Since people apostatize then either baptism does not save infants or complete justification is not given in baptism. Though both options are unacceptable to Luther, the fact that the work of baptism is not completed until death lends itself to the latter. Interestingly, in order to resolve this tension, later Lutheranism taught that what is given in baptism can be lost.

  • Truth Unites… and Divides

    (From the comment thread at Beggars All)

    James,

    Wow! That article by D. Patrick Ramsey was terrific! Thanks for referring me to it!

    Very insightful and well-researched and well-argued.

    Here’s one passage (among many) that stood out:

    “A related problem is that Luther’s view of the efficacy of baptism is in tension with his belief that baptism signifies and accomplishes full and complete justification. This tension is created by the fact that baptized people apostatize. Since people apostatize then either baptism does not save infants or complete justification is not given in baptism. Though both options are unacceptable to Luther, the fact that the work of baptism is not completed until death lends itself to the latter. Interestingly, in order to resolve this tension, later Lutheranism taught that what is given in baptism can be lost.

  • Grace

    This is a hoot! and there is more.

    Unknown said…

    That is a stupid question, TuaD, considering your constant rampages against the concept over on Gene Veith’s blog. Anyone familiar enough with Lutheran Confessions, or even just some of the basic writings of Luther himself, would know Luther taught baptismal regeneration. Why exactly are you trying to derail the subject at hand with a needless question like that when even just a simple wikipedia search or reading the section on Baptism in the Small Catechism (texts copies of which can easily be found online at various places a google search would take you to) would answer your question? But more than likely you are more trying to derail the thread so you can go on your normal rants about the doctrine…if that is the case, please refrain so actual discussion of the topic at hand can take place.
    http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2012/02/luther-coined-term-antinomian.html

  • Grace

    This is a hoot! and there is more.

    Unknown said…

    That is a stupid question, TuaD, considering your constant rampages against the concept over on Gene Veith’s blog. Anyone familiar enough with Lutheran Confessions, or even just some of the basic writings of Luther himself, would know Luther taught baptismal regeneration. Why exactly are you trying to derail the subject at hand with a needless question like that when even just a simple wikipedia search or reading the section on Baptism in the Small Catechism (texts copies of which can easily be found online at various places a google search would take you to) would answer your question? But more than likely you are more trying to derail the thread so you can go on your normal rants about the doctrine…if that is the case, please refrain so actual discussion of the topic at hand can take place.
    http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2012/02/luther-coined-term-antinomian.html

  • http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com Rhology

    Also from Beggars All…

    Truth Unites… and Divides said…
    “We Lutherans love tension. :)

    There are different kinds of tension. Lutheran tension is not the good or helpful kind.

    There are legitimate appeals to mystery and paradox. And there are illegitimate appeals to mystery and paradox.

    And some folks sweep embarrassing stupidity under the rug named Mystery and hope no one notices.

    8:12 AM, FEBRUARY 17, 2012

    Yep. The Lutheran attacks on reason in which y’all ignore obvious contradictions in your theology is very worrisome.

  • http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com Rhology

    Also from Beggars All…

    Truth Unites… and Divides said…
    “We Lutherans love tension. :)

    There are different kinds of tension. Lutheran tension is not the good or helpful kind.

    There are legitimate appeals to mystery and paradox. And there are illegitimate appeals to mystery and paradox.

    And some folks sweep embarrassing stupidity under the rug named Mystery and hope no one notices.

    8:12 AM, FEBRUARY 17, 2012

    Yep. The Lutheran attacks on reason in which y’all ignore obvious contradictions in your theology is very worrisome.

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 84.

    “Mr. Once Saved Always Saved” exclaimed over at Beggars All:

    Wow! That article by D. Patrick Ramsey [Presbyterian] was terrific!

    He then commented:

    Very insightful and well-researched and well-argued.

    He then he gave this quote from Ramsey as an example:

    “Interestingly, in order to resolve this tension, later Lutheranism taught that what is given in baptism can be lost.”

    Say what? Where in early Lutheranism was it taught that the baptized can’t fall from grace and be eternally lost? Where in Ramsey’s article are the quotes from early Lutheran theologians showing how they held a different view from later Lutheran theologians? (Ramsey offers nothing in support of his statement but a footnote referencing the work of another Presbyterian, R. Scott Clark.) Maybe “Mr. Once Saved Always Saved” got a bit too excited about an article that wasn’t quite so well-researched and well-argued as he thinks. But that’s okay. We all understand how easy it is to fall head-over-heels for something that seems to support a pet heterodoxy.

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 84.

    “Mr. Once Saved Always Saved” exclaimed over at Beggars All:

    Wow! That article by D. Patrick Ramsey [Presbyterian] was terrific!

    He then commented:

    Very insightful and well-researched and well-argued.

    He then he gave this quote from Ramsey as an example:

    “Interestingly, in order to resolve this tension, later Lutheranism taught that what is given in baptism can be lost.”

    Say what? Where in early Lutheranism was it taught that the baptized can’t fall from grace and be eternally lost? Where in Ramsey’s article are the quotes from early Lutheran theologians showing how they held a different view from later Lutheran theologians? (Ramsey offers nothing in support of his statement but a footnote referencing the work of another Presbyterian, R. Scott Clark.) Maybe “Mr. Once Saved Always Saved” got a bit too excited about an article that wasn’t quite so well-researched and well-argued as he thinks. But that’s okay. We all understand how easy it is to fall head-over-heels for something that seems to support a pet heterodoxy.

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 86. Hey! Our theology causes Calvinists to worry. Cool!

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 86. Hey! Our theology causes Calvinists to worry. Cool!

  • SKPeterson

    Lutherans are the Alfred E. Neuman’s of the theological world.

  • SKPeterson

    Lutherans are the Alfred E. Neuman’s of the theological world.

  • Grace

    However, the individual will not give their denomination or church affiliation. Why is that?

  • Grace

    However, the individual will not give their denomination or church affiliation. Why is that?

  • Tom Hering

    “GLUP! GLIK! SPLORP! SLOOPLE! CHOMPLE! GARK! SKLORSH! GLUK! KLOONG! KAPLAM! SPMAM! POONG! BOONG! KLOON! PLAM! FLADDAP! SLURK! GLUP! DRIPPLE! BLIT! SHPLIPLE! DROOT! GLORT! GLURKLE!” – Don Martin.

  • Tom Hering

    “GLUP! GLIK! SPLORP! SLOOPLE! CHOMPLE! GARK! SKLORSH! GLUK! KLOONG! KAPLAM! SPMAM! POONG! BOONG! KLOON! PLAM! FLADDAP! SLURK! GLUP! DRIPPLE! BLIT! SHPLIPLE! DROOT! GLORT! GLURKLE!” – Don Martin.

  • Tom Hering

    @ 90, because he wants to argue others’ beliefs, but he doesn’t want anyone to be able to argue his beliefs. Because he’s highly insecure about them. Which is why he needs, so desperately, to prove the beliefs of others are even less grounded than his – even if he has to deliberately misrepresent what others believe, and repeat his misrepresentations over and over again. It’s a poor substitute for actual argumentation, but it’s all he’s got.

  • Tom Hering

    @ 90, because he wants to argue others’ beliefs, but he doesn’t want anyone to be able to argue his beliefs. Because he’s highly insecure about them. Which is why he needs, so desperately, to prove the beliefs of others are even less grounded than his – even if he has to deliberately misrepresent what others believe, and repeat his misrepresentations over and over again. It’s a poor substitute for actual argumentation, but it’s all he’s got.

  • Grace

    Tom,

    You’re right. I’ve seen it done before, and not to long ago, maybe 8 months, from a source I would never have suspected. Strange thing is; they are the very ones who spend their time “investigating” other churches and groups – enough said!

    The individual/individuals who do this sort of thing are embarrassed regarding their own church affliation.

    Very insightful Tom.

  • Grace

    Tom,

    You’re right. I’ve seen it done before, and not to long ago, maybe 8 months, from a source I would never have suspected. Strange thing is; they are the very ones who spend their time “investigating” other churches and groups – enough said!

    The individual/individuals who do this sort of thing are embarrassed regarding their own church affliation.

    Very insightful Tom.

  • Tom Hering

    Thanks, Grace, but I don’t think “Mr. Once Saved Always Saved” is embarassed so much as he’s insecure. I mean, would anyone secure in his beliefs and affiliation hide them from others? Wouldn’t a secure person just state their own beliefs openly, and defend them? But maybe it’s his very salvation he’s really insecure about. Hence his desperate need to promote the doctrine of eternal security. But not in a forthright manner, so the doctrine can’t be challenged, and he can’t be made to feel even more insecure.

    I love amateur psychology! :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Thanks, Grace, but I don’t think “Mr. Once Saved Always Saved” is embarassed so much as he’s insecure. I mean, would anyone secure in his beliefs and affiliation hide them from others? Wouldn’t a secure person just state their own beliefs openly, and defend them? But maybe it’s his very salvation he’s really insecure about. Hence his desperate need to promote the doctrine of eternal security. But not in a forthright manner, so the doctrine can’t be challenged, and he can’t be made to feel even more insecure.

    I love amateur psychology! :-D

  • Grace

    Tom,

    I would agree with you except that; the person/persons I mentioned earlier are very serious about disrupting churches, and individuals, making statements that are so clever, they cannot be cornered. I found out, only because I knew the true story of one of their claims – they had no idea I was connected and had first hand knowledge of the situation. The anger from being found out was shocking – ((Tom, I am unable to say much more, for obvious reason))

    This sort of underhanded work is wrong. It’s one thing to disagree, using Scripture, it’s another thing to misapply words, over and over again, twisting the content.

  • Grace

    Tom,

    I would agree with you except that; the person/persons I mentioned earlier are very serious about disrupting churches, and individuals, making statements that are so clever, they cannot be cornered. I found out, only because I knew the true story of one of their claims – they had no idea I was connected and had first hand knowledge of the situation. The anger from being found out was shocking – ((Tom, I am unable to say much more, for obvious reason))

    This sort of underhanded work is wrong. It’s one thing to disagree, using Scripture, it’s another thing to misapply words, over and over again, twisting the content.

  • http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/ James Swan

    R. Scott Clark is not a Presbyterian.

    As to Lutherans and mystery / tension… Reformed people believe that to. But, if the Scriptures have resolutions on particular issues, appealing to mystery or tension is unwarranted.

    I also get a chuckle out of Luther putting forth “ubiquity” in regard to the Lord’s Supper while elsewhere criticizing reason as of the devil (as if arriving at “ubiquity” was not the result of “reason).

  • http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/ James Swan

    R. Scott Clark is not a Presbyterian.

    As to Lutherans and mystery / tension… Reformed people believe that to. But, if the Scriptures have resolutions on particular issues, appealing to mystery or tension is unwarranted.

    I also get a chuckle out of Luther putting forth “ubiquity” in regard to the Lord’s Supper while elsewhere criticizing reason as of the devil (as if arriving at “ubiquity” was not the result of “reason).

  • Grace

    James @ 96

    “R. Scott Clark is not a Presbyterian.”

    You’re right he’s affilated with Oceanside United Reformed Church, in Oceanside CA. Scott Clark, is an associate pastor. But he is a Calvinist from a toe jump. Clark is a Calvin Chapelist.

  • Grace

    James @ 96

    “R. Scott Clark is not a Presbyterian.”

    You’re right he’s affilated with Oceanside United Reformed Church, in Oceanside CA. Scott Clark, is an associate pastor. But he is a Calvinist from a toe jump. Clark is a Calvin Chapelist.

  • SKPeterson

    Jumping into God mode here – I think everyone on thid forum is a saved believing Christian. Even TuaD. Even Tom who has shown ample evidence of his rank godlessness on numerous occasions when he has advanced his political viewpoints. and by thid I mean this. mobile devices are a …

  • SKPeterson

    Jumping into God mode here – I think everyone on thid forum is a saved believing Christian. Even TuaD. Even Tom who has shown ample evidence of his rank godlessness on numerous occasions when he has advanced his political viewpoints. and by thid I mean this. mobile devices are a …

  • Grace

    SK,

    I would agree with you, however, no one knows the background, its all been AVOIDED.

    If someone isn’t big enough to state their church affiliation, THEIR doctrinal stand, we don’t know WHERE they stand. It’s all hidden, that doesn’t work for me.

  • Grace

    SK,

    I would agree with you, however, no one knows the background, its all been AVOIDED.

    If someone isn’t big enough to state their church affiliation, THEIR doctrinal stand, we don’t know WHERE they stand. It’s all hidden, that doesn’t work for me.

  • Tom Hering

    My godlessness is NOT rank. It’s quite sophisticated and sweet-smelling, thank you.

  • Tom Hering

    My godlessness is NOT rank. It’s quite sophisticated and sweet-smelling, thank you.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X